Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UDOO Looks To Combine Best of Raspberry Pi, Arduino

Posted by timothy on from the now-they're-just-negotiating-a-price dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Kickstarter campaign for the UDOO board is 7 days out from closing and they currently sit just under $4,000 short of their stretch goal of $500,000. The UDOO is an attempt to produce a single board which would combine the best parts of both Raspberry Pi and Arduino. UDOO will have a 1GHz ARM i.MX6 CPU in either a Dual Core or Quad Core flavor, 1 GB DDR3 RAM, HDMI and LVDS + Touch, and both an RJ45 port and an on board Wifi Module. Along with those specs, it will be compatible with Arduino DUE R3. The UDOO will utilize Micro SD as a boot device and run both Linux and Android. Currently on Kickstarter, the Dual Core starts at a pledge of $109."

59 comments

  1. Best of? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Udoo dual core: 110$
    Arduino DUE: 50$
    Raspberry Pi (model B): 40$
    Arduino Uno: 30$
    Arduino Pro mini: 10$
    ATmega328P: 3.50$

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    1. Re:Best of? by KiloByte · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Odroid-U2 $89, four cores at twice the clock, twice the memory.

      Most of us don't need GPIO/etc so it's not in the standard, you can get that on an $15 expansion board.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:Best of? by greg1104 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cool part about the Raspberry Pi is that it runs Linux. Its ability to interface with non computing hardware could be better.

      The cool part about the Arduino is its analog and digital I/O interfaces. It has standard connectors for that purpose, beaten into useful form via a lot of people over the years, and there's even a good sized industry providing parts that plug into them. I can wander to my local Microcenter and get all sorts of Arduino parts nowadays.

      The combination of the two, running Linux but with the Arduino interfaces, can cost more than both chips combined and still be worthwhile. That's what the UDOO is trying to do. If your goal is to have a generic system that can do all sorts of hacking, this is a possibility for such a device. Maybe the price will even come down over time to have less of a premium.

    3. Re:Best of? by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      You can wire an arduino and raspberry together and get the best of both worlds. Also, MicroCenter carries Raspberry Pis at retail now.Not sure why you dont like the busses available on the Pi's GPIO. Its I2c, serial, most of the stuff on the Arduino. I take sensors from my arduino and use them on my pi all the time.

      --
      Good-bye
    4. Re:Best of? by greg1104 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most of my computer interfacing work crosses over into analog signals, and I'm not always in the mood to wire up circuitry to make a Pi talk to them. And some days I don't want two boards talking to one another via some interface I maintain; I'd like to just have one board to deal with and move on. That's the mindset the UDOO is targeting.

    5. Re:Best of? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Forgot http://beagleboard.org/Products/BeagleBone%20Black The BeagleBoard Black 45$ and supports Android and Linux
      [just copy/paste from their page]
      Processor: AM335x 1GHz ARM® Cortex-A8
      3D graphics accelerator
      NEON floating-point accelerator
      2x PRU 32-bit microcontrollers

      Connectivity"
      USB client for power & debug
      USB host
      Ethernet
      HDMI
      2x 46 pin headers

      Software Compatibility:
      Ångström Linux
      Android
      Ubuntu
      Cloud9 IDE on Node.js w/ BoneScript library
      plus much more

    6. Re:Best of? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Raspberry Pi: has CPU power but not many pins
      Arduino: no CPU power but lots of pins, and an ecosystem of shields to help amateurs use those pins

    7. Re:Best of? by rthille · · Score: 1

      Microchip PIC12683: Free samples :-)

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    8. Re:Best of? by geoskd · · Score: 3, Informative

      The cool part about the Raspberry Pi is that it runs Linux. Its ability to interface with non computing hardware could be better.

      The cool part about the Arduino is its analog and digital I/O interfaces. It has standard connectors for that purpose, beaten into useful form via a lot of people over the years, and there's even a good sized industry providing parts that plug into them. I can wander to my local Microcenter and get all sorts of Arduino parts nowadays.

      The combination of the two, running Linux but with the Arduino interfaces, can cost more than both chips combined and still be worthwhile. That's what the UDOO is trying to do. If your goal is to have a generic system that can do all sorts of hacking, this is a possibility for such a device. Maybe the price will even come down over time to have less of a premium.

      Or you could skip all of that and get a Beaglebone Black. If you want the GPIOs and a powerful processor, get a Beaglebone. The only downside I have found so far is that it only does 720P, not 1080P, but I'm using it for embedded stuff which means a headless system anyways. With 50+ digital IO, and 7 analog inputs, you'll be hard pressed to get anything even remotely close for the price.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    9. Re:Best of? by melstav · · Score: 1

      Take the ODroid and bolt an Arduino DUE onto the same PCB. That's pretty much exactly what this is.

    10. Re:Best of? by melstav · · Score: 2

      The $110 UDOO Dual core is most comparable to : RPi x 2 + Arduino DUE = $130 (using your numbers)

      The $130 UDOO Quad core is most comparable to : RPi x 4 + Arduino DUE = $210

      So yes, if you're just going to compare one embedded board to another, without taking into account their relative capabilities, the UDOO is more expensive. If instead, you compared the boards based on BOTH cost AND capabilities, things look very different.

      Sure, for some things an Arduino mini is going to be plenty. But some projects make more sense with a multicore system processor and an I/O subprocessor.

    11. Re:Best of? by drolli · · Score: 1

      And why is "running linux" a good thing for a microcontroller with a function which is implemented in 20 lines of C?

      Its also a misconception that linux single-board computers for experimenting with GPIO in this price range dont exist.

    12. Re:Best of? by fufufang · · Score: 1

      The combination of the two, running Linux but with the Arduino interfaces, can cost more than both chips combined and still be worthwhile.

      How about Beaglebone Black?

    13. Re:Best of? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Beaglebone series: more CPU power than a Pi and plenty of IO including anlog inputs. The original beaglebone white was quite a bit cheaper than the udoo and the beaglebone black is cheaper still (though slightly more than a Pi)

      Now granted the udoo is dual/quad core while the beaglebone black is only single core but I bet the hype round this will lead to it getting used where the beaglebone black is a better fit.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    14. Re:Best of? by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip on the Odroid-U2, that looks interesting. I'll check it out for sure.

      But this UDOO board sounds like it's for me, not you...

      I'm currently experimenting with IOIO boards and Android phones/tablets, so something like this would be a nice option.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  2. Meh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what UDOO would like you to think.

    As for me, I'm deploying the U.R.T.V.s even as I type. This menace must be stopped.

  3. Two ARM processors? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the Kickstarter page, it seems this has two ARM processors. Call me crazy but it would make for an incredible platform for a MAME machine. Make the quad-core CPU emulate the hardware and the single-core emulate the CPU(s) of the original machine.

    The development of FPGA Arcade seems too slow for my taste.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    1. Re:Two ARM processors? by hamster_nz · · Score: 1

      As FPGA Arcade are conversions of hardware to run in an FPGA each conversion requires a lot more work than software emulation - but it can be done! Drag down some arcade schematics of the Web, get a cheap FPGA board and get started - see this post

      For each different hardware platform I guess it takes three months of spare time to convert - as long as usable implementations for the major ICs can be found!

    2. Re:Two ARM processors? by melstav · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the point. He wants other people to do the work of porting the games. He just wants to be able to play them on an FPGA.

    3. Re:Two ARM processors? by melstav · · Score: 1

      Except that when you're trying to emulate processors and hardware, trying to spread that across multiple threads makes trying to get clock-cycle-perfect synchronization between the different parts of the emulated hardware gets really freaking hard. And since MAME is all about emulating the hardware as perfectly as possible, that's not gonna happen.It's been discussed at length in the various MAME mailing lists and FAQs.

      MAME does use multithreading for graphics rendering, but all of the hardware emulation is single-threaded.

      Now, if you were to build an arcade cabinet around this thing, connect the arcade controls to the board's Arduino, and load a sketch that emulates either a keyboard or multiple gamepads.

  4. What... like a pcDuino? by hamster_nz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've got a US$60 pcDuino, which is close to this. Sort of like a Raspberry Pi with Arduino(ish) I/O headers - they just lack the same spacing so an interposer is required. Runs Andriod, Linux and XBMC just fine...

    The devil is in the detail. I wonder how good their Arduino work-a-like API library will be... with the ADCs have the same resolution? Will timing sensitive bit-banged I/O still work OK? Will PWM be the same?

    1. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      That's pretty cool, but why for no jelly bean? Lots of JB-only features these days, and the OS itself tends to be easier on the resources (more free memory on JB roms than ICS roms!)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      The implementation is such that the devil in the details will be banished; but replaced by the devil in communicating with the details:

      The Arduino work-a-like should be perfect, since the 'Arduino' half of the system is provided by exactly the same Atmel SAM3X8E as the Arduino Due, with the same I/O headers and so forth. The Freescale Cortex-A9 half of the board can communicate with the Atmel side; but has no role in attempting to emulate Arduino anything.

      However, because of that, it's architecturally just a reasonably speed ARM board with an Arduino connected to it. Smaller footprint, because the two systems share a board; but software running on the Cortex-A9 side of things will just see a USB device of whatever flavor the Arduino is providing(they used to be USB serial only; but I think they can emulate HID devices and possibly a few other things now as well). The two processors don't share a memory space, or have automagic access to one another's peripherals, or anything of that nature.

    3. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by melstav · · Score: 1

      I wonder how good their Arduino work-a-like API library will be...

      It won't be.... "a work-a-like", that is. The UDOO board is, quite literally, what you get if you take an Arduino DUE and bolt it onto the same PCB as a quad-core ARM system with a SATA port(*), instead of using a USB cable to connect the two. The Arduino code runs directly on the ATSAM3U, just as it would on a "real" Arduino DUE.

      (*) The dual-core board will *NOT* have a SATA port.

    4. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by melstav · · Score: 1

      Oh, and the pcDuino is "close to" this in so far as a board with only a single-core ARM Cortex-A8 can be considered "close to" a board with a dual (or quad) ARM Cortex-A9 *AND* the same Cortex-M3 that's on the Arduino DUE.

      Which is to say, not very.

    5. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by am+2k · · Score: 1

      The two processors don't share a memory space, or have automagic access to one another's peripherals, or anything of that nature.

      The two processors share the digital GPIOs, so there's a lot of peripheral sharing possible (this doesn't include WiFi though, as that chip is wired directly to the Cortex A9).

    6. Re:What... like a pcDuino? by hamster_nz · · Score: 1

      Oh - I was more thinking like it was a ARM board running a full Linux stack, that had the headers you need to plug random bits and bobs in, to so stuff... my mistake.

      Let me just duct-tape an Arduino to my Cubieboard and jumper the power and serial ports together...

  5. at $109 they miss the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    it's more expensive than buying an arduino, an Pi, and a board to connect the two.

    It's more powerful than the Pi, but there never was any shortage of boards that were more powerful than the Pi and also more expensive. Those boards used to be in the $200 range, so at $109 Udoo is a bit better, but it's nowhere close to the pricepoint of the Pi or BeagleBone Black

    At $35 the Pi is something that you can give to kids without having to really think about it. It's also something that you can just install in a project and leave it.

    At $109 the Uboo becomes something that you think much harder about giving to someone, and you don't just leave it in a project, you remove it from one project to build the next

    David Lang

    1. Re:at $109 they miss the point by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I think the best thing about the PI is that it proved a point. There is a market for cheap, capable tiny computer boards for projects. The PI selling one million units spurred all kinds of hardware development. Even if they aren't as cheap as the PI it still improves the prospects for making impressive projects.

    2. Re:at $109 they miss the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In January they passed one million units, in a recent posting they said that now they have passwd 1.5M units.

  6. Nice robot controller by Animats · · Score: 1

    Now that's a nice robot controller.

  7. Just passed 500k by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi,

    My pledge made it pass US$ 500k.

    Nice device :D

  8. more than one usb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of the SBCs with ARM SoC's I've looked at, like RRi and BeagleBone have only a single USB channel that everything goes through. I found that it was impossible to reliably transfer audio into the device while monitoring levels over a WIFI adapter that necessarily hangs off the same USB channel. Since the audio runs in isochronous mode the USB controller just drops frames when things get tight. Maybe it would work better with a low latency kernel but I also found that the preemptive and low latency kernels are buggy on the BeagleBone I was trying and probably all ARM platforms. For my app, an audio recorder, I had to switch to a PicoITX format Atom. It's way overkill, expensive, sucks power, and gets very hot but it has four separate USB channels and preemptive/low-latency is debugged on x86 so it actually works.

    1. Re:more than one usb? by geoskd · · Score: 1

      All of the SBCs with ARM SoC's I've looked at, like RRi and BeagleBone have only a single USB channel that everything goes through. I found that it was impossible to reliably transfer audio into the device while monitoring levels over a WIFI adapter that necessarily hangs off the same USB channel. Since the audio runs in isochronous mode the USB controller just drops frames when things get tight. Maybe it would work better with a low latency kernel but I also found that the preemptive and low latency kernels are buggy on the BeagleBone I was trying and probably all ARM platforms. For my app, an audio recorder, I had to switch to a PicoITX format Atom. It's way overkill, expensive, sucks power, and gets very hot but it has four separate USB channels and preemptive/low-latency is debugged on x86 so it actually works.

      I'm not sure, but I thought I read somewhere that the Beaglebone Black separated the ethernet from the USB onto different access ports, thus freeing more resources for both. I could be wrong though, I've been reading far too many technical documents lately... Eyes getting kind of blurry...

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    2. Re:more than one usb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like the SoC has two USB ports but on the BB-Black one is used for host and the other for client. So audio and wifi would still be on the same USB port unless you do something weird like ethernetwifi.

    3. Re:more than one usb? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      While one port is a device port I believe it could be converted to a second host port with some relatively minor hackery.

      Having looked at the schematics I belive the following steps should do it

      1: put a blob of solder between the ground and ID pins of the mini-USB connector (this step may be able to be avoided either by finding a source of mini-B plugs with the ID pin accessible or by forcing things in software)
      2: hack up a USB cable to adapt the connectors and inject power.

      Note: I have not tested these steps and do not intend to test them until and unless I have a need for a second host port in a beaglebone black based project.

      Another option that might be worth looking into for the GGPs application is to ditch the USB audio and look into I2S.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  9. I hate to break it to them by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    ...but here's almost exactly the same specs, assembled and with Android 4.1, for $80:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834686007
    1GHz A9 CPU
    1GB DDR3
    Touchscreen
    onboard wifi
    Plus this has a preconfigured OS plus I heard it's easily rootable to run Linux and whatever else and a Mali 3D accelerator/GPU which is quite nice at HD netflix and games.

    1. Re:I hate to break it to them by idlake · · Score: 2

      No, it doesn't have the same specs: it's missing the Arduino. People buy don't by these boards to run Android, they buy them to develop embedded applications.

    2. Re:I hate to break it to them by melstav · · Score: 1

      It's also only a single-core A9. Not dual or quad. And it lacks a SATA port.

    3. Re:I hate to break it to them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't usually matter for embedded applications.

    4. Re:I hate to break it to them by melstav · · Score: 1

      While I will grant that you're right, "doesn't usually" is not the same as "never".

  10. Re:It will never catch on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know it's sarcasm by I totally agree with it like it's not.
    I mean how could a thing which tries to combine best of anything could run Android? This only fact will make it a worthless piece of junk. Hell, even my mother, who has like no expectations of what a computer can do (she's in her late 50s) couldn't use this POS on her Toshiba AC100 so I've got to install Ubuntu and then Lubuntu for her..
    All the stuff that comes out is still comparable in terms of hardware to Efika MX SmartTop, but they don't port shit to this thing any more. All it can run is older release of Debian and something like Gentoo — the thing you only use to run gdb all day to investigate what exactly breaks your system.
    They still want to make the next big ARM-thing, but they don't wanna do shit to port something proper and think Android will do the thing for most of us. Hell no! I want a real linux distr. that can run real applications not a subset of crappy tablet/smartphone apps if you want me to buy anything ARM-based which is not a tablet or smartphone again.

  11. Americans.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bigger is better. Yeah. Whopper makes you fatter faster.

    The key thing about RPI is the ability to modify everything instead of being caught in the Golden Cage of $100 tablets with their "impressive" displays.

    Let me paint an alternative picture:

    + 68000 CPU, 8 MHz
    + 4 Megabytes of RAM
    + 1 MHz DAC
    + 1 MHz ADC
    + 10Mbit Ethernet
    + A 500x500 pixel black/white display
    + All drivers FOSS
    + Timer Chip
    + Small FPGA to "dynamize" everything
    + Some power amplifiers which can be connected to the DAC
    + A small FOSS Unix variant which needs 100k of RAM. That IS doable. We don't need the Linux monster everywhere.
    + Completely buildable using through-hole parts/sockets and wire-wrap. No need for a PCB !
    + A true realtime OS

    This kind of computer would not compete with a PC, but would enable people to be massively creative: Think of your self-built oscilloscope, your self-built Software Defined Radio, your self-built CB data network to free yourself from the oppression of the telcos and the state, your self-built lego robot controller, your self-built electro-car controller, your self-built, covert license-plate scanner which enables you to realize when the spooks zero in to your area (do some nice statistics and you can do that!).

    This kind of thing is going to happen and it won't need money. What we need is an

    Alternative Fürs Rechnen !

  12. STM32F4Discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You forgot one: STM32F4Discovery: $14

  13. Arduino Yun by idlake · · Score: 1

    Arduino is coming out with the Yun, another combination of non-real time Linux chip and real-time ATmega chip, and it includes WiFi. It also is ready to go when you power it on, and allows you to upload sketches over the air. It looks like a better deal and better design to me for many applications.

    The UDOO has HDMI output and some other features, but it's not so clear to me what the advantage of UDOO is over just plugging a regular Arduino into a Raspberry Pi via USB (and the resulting combo is cheaper to boot).

    1. Re:Arduino Yun by melstav · · Score: 1

      The UDOO has HDMI output and some other features, but it's not so clear to me what the advantage of UDOO is over just plugging a regular Arduino into a Raspberry Pi via USB (and the resulting combo is cheaper to boot).

      Actually, the RPi is single-core, and thus you would have to bolt FOUR of them (at $35/ea) together with an Arduino DUE (at $50) to have something comparable to the $130 UDOO Quad, (board-only -- the board packaged with power supply, 2 preloaded SDCards, and HDMI cable is $160) and that mess wouldn't get you the SATA port that's on the UDOO Quad. -- The dual-core UDOO doesn't have SATA.

    2. Re:Arduino Yun by idlake · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point. These devices are for embedded applications and robotics, where low power and low cost matter. SATA, HDMI, and (in many applications) multiple cores are not an advantage. I think the UDOO is too big and too expensive for applications where you want an Arduino.

    3. Re:Arduino Yun by melstav · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think it is YOU who are missing the point. Because if an Arduino will satisfy your needs, then by god, use the Arduino! If your project's small enough that a $30 Arduino UNO will be ample for what you want it to do, you'd be downright silly to build your project around one of these, instead.

      But you're falling into the same trap that a lot of other people are -- thinking that all embedded systems have the same needs. Not all embedded systems need to be low-power, battery operated, or have no need for a display or a disk controller. Some robots need a lot more processing power than you can cram in an 8-bit micro, especially if you're dabbling in machine vision and autonomous systems. A document scanner (not to be confused with a document camera), laser printer, blu-ray player, and an XBOX 360 are all examples of "embedded systems", too.

      The above list showcases another misconception about embedded systems: Not all embedded systems can stand alone. Sure, you could probably build a scanner around an Arduino -- I've certainly had scanners in the last 30 years that were built around much less capable microcontrollers -- but you'd need an external computer to drive the thing and to stitch the images coming off the sensor together into one single page and save that as whatever document format you want. If you just want to connect it to your desktop computer or you've already got a spare PC that you want to dedicate to controlling your project, that's fine. But you can save a lot of space and power if everything were able to be integrated into a single system.

      I'm not trying to say that you should go out and buy a stack of these and use 'em everywhere you'd use an Arduino. That wouldn't make any sense. It's entirely possible that you, personally, are never going to contemplate a project that would ever need more than an Arduino UNO, or maybe you'll eventually upgrade to a DUE. And that's okay. Really, it is. But just because YOU don't have a need for something like this, doesn't change the fact that some of the rest of us might.

  14. Yawn, been done, got one... by CaptainOfSpray · · Score: 2

    ...it's called a Gertboard http://uk.farnell.com/gertboard/gertboard/board-gertboard-assembled/dp/2250034, plugs directly onto the Pi, has an Arduino, a motor controller chip, an A/D and D/A chip on it, breaks out all the GPIO pins, buffered, completely jumperable. Price equiv 46 USD.

    --
    "Cock Up Your Beaver" does not mean what you think. This sig is intended to clog filters and annoy do-gooders
  15. Still missing the key for me, POE by jackb_guppy · · Score: 1

    Power over ethernet or USB3 device port (ie slave to another computer) would make these type of machines MUCH better, because the stand alone power supply is no longer needed. Think of BEOWULF cluster that was here on /. The cool think there was a different way of connecting power to each of the 32 RPi. But that was also two more power supplies to power them. If the RPi could have gotten POE, then switch he used could have been upgraded and all RPi powered just by being connected. Think of those CISCO phones on your desk. Thats how they work.

    I also would like monitors to offer a USB port with enough power to run these machines (USB). Just like the in-line amps for HD antennas these days, Use the USB port on the back of the TV to power themselves.

    My current RPi has Plugable USB 2.0 4 port w/ BC 1.1 Charging Hub. I use one port to power RPi and the other 3 ports to extend the USB of RPi. It can even power a hard drive connected to hub. But it looks like WART on back of RPi taking away the small size with lots of wires going in and out. Not clean looking.

  16. POF beats POE anyday. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I stuck a rubber hose up my butt and routed the Power Of Flatulence to a bunser burner which heats up water in a small boiler which powers a hobby size steam engine hooked to a small generator, add in a few diodes and resistors and what-not, and you get a never-ending power supply for all your devices.

  17. lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as someone who is posting from a raspberry pi, it seems overpriced. but it's a cool concept! i need to look into arduino

  18. $500000 for a $100 device? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    Why on earth does someone need a $500000 Kickstarter to build a device with a $100 BOM? The R&D in this case is not expensive. Even if they have 10 goes at it the BOM will be maybe a tad over $1k. What did they have 10 people working full time for a year trying to build this? What ever happened to getting a loan and investing a bit of time into creating a product?

    Is $4000 going to be the difference between pass and fail for this project? Are the people going to get to $496000 and say, "Oh well we tried, sorry guys it won't happen." and then head off to the Bahamas?

    1. Re:$500000 for a $100 device? by dballanc · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong, but to me it reads that they HAVE 500k pledged, of 27k desired. Which essentially means their excess pledges are more like 'preorders' for a the final product. That should allow them to negotiate better quantity deals for manufacturing costs at the least.

    2. Re:$500000 for a $100 device? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brb, coming up with an idea that will kick this things ass, never see the light of day and give me lots of erm, funding.

  19. Hey! It's almost a computer! by Jimhotep · · Score: 2

    This trend should lead to a full computer! Maybe like the one I had 10 years ago!

  20. Real-time code in a Cortex-A class system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I'd like to see is something that runs like an Arduino - real-time, no OS - but with processing power more comparable to a Raspberry Pi (or better couldn't hurt).

    At the moment the fastest on-the-metal stuff with good support seems to be the Parallax Propeller and the various Cortex-M boards like the Arduino Due, Maple, mbed, and so on. The same sort of stuff applies here as in full PCs: what kind of things can be done with more power? We won't really know until we get more power.

    The problem in my current project is that we need both some simple (0.1 ms on an AVR) routines run every 2-3 ms or less AND as much raw number-crunching power as we can get (OK, modern GPUs are overkill, though that kind of parallel architecture would be nice). The first is more important. I hope to soon be using a Propeller + a PCDuino, which will be a massive improvement over the current Arduino Uno. The problem is that anything real-time can't do the number-crunching, and vice versa. It's also got to fit in a small space - Pico-ITX is probably the absolute max form factor, so no hooking an AVR up to a real PC.

    UDOO looks to achieve what I was about to already, but in one package. Yes, it's good, but still not quite what I want, and it's certainly not living up to the headline.

  21. Some sense at last :) by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    they've had the good sense to bring almost all of the connections you need to make to the same side of the board instead of wherever they managed to get the tracks to run to that had a bit of spare space on the Raspberry Pi. I'm not knocking the Pi though, for the price it's amazing and I've got my hands on a 512 MB model B, but rather inconvenient with the connections coming out on all four edges.

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.